Jump to content
The Official Site of the Montréal Canadiens
Canadiens de Montreal

Thomas Vanek


Recommended Posts

FWIW, I heard the same arguments about our need for scoring when Gainey signed the little three back in 2009. And look how that turned out. We traded the best contract of the bunch (Cammalleri, who's still producing in Calgary). Gomez was a disaster. Gionta had two good seasons, became injury-prone in season 3, and has been in steady decline relative to his cap hit for the past two years. And while Gionta is still serviceable in a third-line role, it's a lot easier to swallow because it's only a five-year contract and the cap hit is lower (and occurred in an era when teams had the option to buy out unproductive players -- we no longer have that option). To go 8/8 or 8/7 on Vanek is a huge gamble. And as roy says, I don't think we're a contender in the short term, so going all-in for a high-risk contract this summer is just not that appealing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Vanek goes to July 1st regardless. I would love to have him on our team, but 8 years is sounding wild to me. I can see Bergevin offering him something big, but I can just as easily imagine Vanek cashing in anywhere he wants to in early July. It's nice that we have acquired him for what's left of this year, but I just really think he's going to have a lot of options this summer, so Montreal might not be at the top of his list.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Vanek goes to July 1st regardless. I would love to have him on our team, but 8 years is sounding wild to me. I can see Bergevin offering him something big, but I can just as easily imagine Vanek cashing in anywhere he wants to in early July. It's nice that we have acquired him for what's left of this year, but I just really think he's going to have a lot of options this summer, so Montreal might not be at the top of his list.

Knowing MB's MO I actually see him offering Vanek 5 years at $8m per. I dont know why but I cant see him giving him more term, unless its for less money...which probably correlates with your hypothesis of an UFA day for Vanek.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unrelated to the contract discussions... Who did Vanek play on a line with in 2006-2007? 43 goals, 41 assists, and +47.



Knowing MB's MO I actually see him offering Vanek 5 years at $8m per. I dont know why but I cant see him giving him more term, unless its for less money...which probably correlates with your hypothesis of an UFA day for Vanek.

Yeah, if Bergevin approaches Vanek's agent and offers that the agent politely says, "We'll get back to you in early July."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unrelated to the contract discussions... Who did Vanek play on a line with in 2006-2007? 43 goals, 41 assists, and +47.

Yeah, if Bergevin approaches Vanek's agent and offers that the agent politely says, "We'll get back to you in early July."

Probably Briere. Maybe Pominville or Afinogenov? They had a great offense that year, took a huge hit after Briere and Drury left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, if Bergevin approaches Vanek's agent and offers that the agent politely says, "We'll get back to you in early July."

And thats fine. If you believe the sources, MB offered NY the deal for Vanek & they said No. He said "well im here, call me if you're ready" and they did.

In negotiations you have to be able to walk away if its not on your term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mrsmarkov

No hat trick, that was a great snipe though!

Agreed. I had a feeling he would score last night. Glad he's getting use to the system and his linemates. It would be great to see him bury those Leafs tomorrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we acquired him at the trade deadline, I told myself that the success's of this team and the chemistry he develops with his linemates would determine whether or not he would re-sign with the team.

The team has been playing great hockey since he joined and the the chemistry he seems to have developed with Patches and Desharnais is great to see.

I also think he really enjoys playing at the Bell Centre (seems to love coming out during the three stars announcement).

I hope he considers making Montreal his home. He's already a fan favorite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My major fear at this point is that we've put all our eggs into one basket with Desharnais and Pacioretty. One line is easy enough to contain in a seven game series, and I would like to see some team-wide chemistry built with regards to Vanek as the season winds down, so that we can successfully shake up lines when we inevitably need to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well and that line will get torn apart in the playoffs with proper line matching. Pacioretty is the only guy with a semblance of a defensive game and he's not winning a Selke any time soon.

Pacioretty-DD-Vanek feels like it should work well but they're getting horribly outshot and outchanced, because Pacioretty is really the only guy who can sustain possession on that line. They're such good forwards that they still capitalize at a high rate but I don't think that line is the answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well and that line will get torn apart in the playoffs with proper line matching. Pacioretty is the only guy with a semblance of a defensive game and he's not winning a Selke any time soon.

Pacioretty-DD-Vanek feels like it should work well but they're getting horribly outshot and outchanced, because Pacioretty is really the only guy who can sustain possession on that line. They're such good forwards that they still capitalize at a high rate but I don't think that line is the answer.

Ya, the two way ability of that line is definitely a concern. If we're really determined to keep them together we need to go really heavy "Vignault with Sedins" style o-zone starts, like 75-80%+ ozone starts for that line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya, the two way ability of that line is definitely a concern. If we're really determined to keep them together we need to go really heavy "Vignault with Sedins" style o-zone starts, like 75-80%+ ozone starts for that line.

I think that's a good way to go, actually. We can roll 4 lines, and have 3 that are quite good defensively, especially the 4th line and Pleks line, so having one line of pure point producers might not be a bad thing given our depth. The only problem would be if that line went cold or if we ran into a good coach on road games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And do you have faith in MT to do this?

Hard to say. Last season's version of the Habs were the fancy stat and analytics era poster children, DD's line got very easy zone starts, the 4th line was strong defensively and given 10 minutes a night of very heavy grunt work (which is why people were upset that they didn't fight and stuff), which freed up easier matchups for Plekanec and Eller's lines.

This year that's been thrown by the wayside because Murray is so bad that his need to be sheltered means it's very difficult to do it to any more pairings. It means that the 4th line are used to goon it up and for "energy" instead of being the defensive specialists they could be, which means Plekanec plays against the best players on opposing teams every game.

What I'd like to see is the 4th line being used that way again, Moen-White-Bournival/Leblanc/Prust/Weise is a strong defensive line and they could shoulder a lot of the load that Eller's line currently takes and open an opportunity for Pacioretty-DD-Vanek to get good O-zone opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Irrational exuberance is beginning to set in for me. I honestly believe that with a little work, this core's best time to win is in the next 2-5 years. In that context, an 8 year deal to keep Vanek around during the peak seems like a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...